April's CR Diary

I'm curious about the role of the thyroid here. I have hypothyroidism and in my research I have read countless reports of people who gained plenty of pounds after their thyroids pooped out. And then, after correcting their conditions with proper medical intervention, many had a HELL of a time losing the gained weight, if they ever did at all. Many talk about not being able to lose more than a few pounds no matter how restrictive their diets.

Low thyroid people often have reduced body temperature as well.

I know this information is about genetics, and I get the argument about thermodynamics, but I'm really curious about the role of the thyroid.

MR's is a hell of an argument. I know it from experience. I've been predisposed to being on the heavy side from childhood on, being so fond of "tasty" food. I was underweight as a baby since mom insisted on only nursing and I rejected her milk. Once the pediatrician suggested that I might be on a hunger strike because mom's milk didn't taste too good, they started feeding me veggie soup with feta cheese. I was hooked on to taste (especially salty taste, veggies and cheese) ever since. I notice that naturally thin people don't have much interest in taste. Appetite is directly linked to having a sense of taste. People who in general have no appetite tend to just feed themselves to be fed, without paying much attention to the quality or taste of food, people with appetite always have specific requests and rituals with food.
Naturally thin people, from my experience, have no talent in taste. It's like having no talent in visual aesthetics or music or engineering or math. A talent for taste is a genetic talent mostly hazardous for your health. Thus, as MR concludes, it's a genetic and biological problem from the "they can't help it, they love and appreciate it too much" point of view, not the other way around.
z.

To Christopher Gagnon:

I've been doing similar research since my thyroid turned on me :D From what I've been able to gather there hasn't been a whole lot of scholarly research on the non-physiologic sides of thyroid weight gain. I read posts on message boards furious because doctors cite research suggesting that thyroid related weight gain is only 5-10 lbs (now, granted, many doctors are assholes so that might have something to do with the fury). That is clearly not most people's experience.

But, in my experience, my weight gain appears to be mostly mental. When my levothyroxine is working I can look at a simple carb (read: bag of skittles) and say "eh, you'll just give me heartburn." But when I'm having a particularly "hypo" day I'm exhausted but still expected to work/behave normally. Suddenly I don't really care about the heartburn I just want the quickest source of insta-energy possible. And I'll be damned if I can do anything but fall asleep at the end of the day (so, no exercise). So thousands of excess calories later, the slowed metabolism really can't make up for the excess but it isn't necessarily the cause of the excess weight. There's also one of my fav quotes, don't know where I got it, "fat is an endocrine organ". The potential metabolic "double whammy"

Some docs (the "What your Doctor Won't Tell You About Hypothyroidism" guy in particular) seem to have anecdotal evidence that when properly supplemented with the proper hormone ratio his patients have no problem overcoming large weight gain. I think the key is that he's supplementing with T3 and T4. And many people (myself included) who can't get any weight off may only be taking T4.

The current theory I'm working under is pretty much that MR is right. But that willpower alone might not save me here, especially when there's some evidence that better hormone supplementation could be the push that would help. There's no good reason why I can't work out daily (probably what's needed) except for the fact that I'm often too tired to move. And that bag of skittles still looks like the only way to make it through 8 hours at work.

Zeynep, I hear what you're saying but I have to disagree with you to some extent. My parents were both very thin people and while my mother wasn't particularly excited by the taste of food and indeed, as you write, had very little appetite and tended to just feed herself in order to be fed, my father was incredibly "into" the taste and sensory experience of food. If something didn't taste delicious to him, he'd refuse to eat it. I realize these examples are simply anecdotal and have no scientific basis, but they are quite real, nonetheless. In my personal experience, the more dedicated I become to eating almost entirely healthy food, the more important taste and texture have become to me. I have become a "foodie" and one who seeks foods with a lot of "umami". JD :-)

Some people are biologically primed towards being heavier, how could anyone seriously argue with that? It's beyond obvious, does anyone really need studies to prove this? --(Body weight is extremely heritable, any twin study would show that pretty clearly if a person really does need "scientific proof")

Environment matters too, people in general weren't as fat before 40 oz. Slurpies and fast food restaurants were to be found on every corner of the city either. (Socioeconomic factors matter too; poor people can mostly afford starch and sugar in their myriad forms so they tend to be fatter in general, no big surprise there either)

I think people get too obsessed with blaming either genetics or environment alone when there are interactional effects between them, neither factor alone is insignificant but neither is all-encompassing either

I hate the moralizing around weight issues, some people just didn't get so lucky in the genetic lottery you know.

On the other hand, we all live in a very consumerist society that encourages people to buy as much as possible, including both food and bizarre diet products along with everything else you could possibly imagine. Environment does actually matter, not just genetics, and as far as food is concerned our environment is pretty toxic. People eat things that are utterly bizarre from the standpoint of our genetically evolved biological systems.--High fructose corn syrup, what the hell is that?--Did this even exist a hundred years ago? Our genetic heritage is from tens of thousands of years ago or longer. Some people's systems can cope better with the assault of toxic junk without gaining a ton of weight or becoming diabetic or having a massive heart attack but it's still not a good thing for anybody to live on pizza and Slurpies. (I suppose someday humans will evolve that can thrive on artificial chemicals but most of us probably won't be among them)

For me, I figure some people are going to be fat, some people are going to be thin, we're all trying our best with what we have to work with genetically. It's still true that people in general are biologically designed to be eating real food not chemicals designed to simulate real food, (in my opinion anyway).

Hi April,

Of the writers at Rudd, are they any which you generally like of the following ...

Becca Krukowski
Beth Rocchio
Carly Keidel
Chelsea Heuer
Christopher Wharton
Corinne Moss-Racusin
Erica Kenney
Jennifer Otten
Jennifer Pomeranz
Kathy Henderson
Kelly Brownell
Marjie Galler
Marlene Schwartz
Meghan O'Connell
Michael Long
Rebecca Puhl
Roberta Friedman
Rogan Kersh
Sarah Novak
Victoria Brescoll

I'd be interested to check one or two out, but would like an informed opinion to save same time.

Thanks! :>)

"The results of these studies show that obesity is not primarily due to energy saving mechanisms"

I believe that is true. But it is important to give some attention to the qualifier "primarily" in that sentence.

Energy saving (eg uber calmness)and energy wasting (e.g. hyper nervousness, jitteriness) mechanisms can play a role in weight balance, gain or loss. And over time, can't small gains or losses add up to large differences in weight?

Also, if the above paragraph is true, might yoga cause weight gain by relaxing the body and lowering the metabolic rate? ... Less calories burned, more calories stored as fat?

CRWilliam,

Not that you asked for my two cents, but...

I actually think the bloggers on Rudd are all pretty interesting, and their posts are generally thought-provoking. The comments from the peanut gallery, however, can be irritating (excepting MR's well researched and insightful post, of course). I'd recommend reading the original posts but skipping the commentary in general, unless you actually enjoy seeing the same, tired arguments recycled ad nauseum.